IsisCB Explore

Article ID: CBB933621108

The Anti-teleologism of Asclepiades and Epicurus in Galen’s de usu partium (2019)

Technai, An International Journal for Ancient Science and Technology
Volume: 10
Pages: 91-117
Publication date: 2019
Language: English

Outside Links

WorldCat

Google Scholar

JSTOR

Epicurianism Medicine Philosophy Physicians; doctors Ancient Asclepiades of Bithynia Lucretius Galen

One of the main reasons for Galen’s criticism of Asclepiades is the anti-teleologism that his medical and philosophical system seems to share with Epicureanism. In the "De Usu Partium," Galen attributes to both Asclepiades and Epicurus the same evolutionary view of human body, focusing on their rejection of the final cause and, therefore, of the idea that the usefulness of the parts is the outcome of a provident design. Such a mechanistic explanation does not recognize any consequential link between the appropriateness of living beings’ bodily parts and the functions that they perform. According to Galen, indeed, Asclepiades agrees with Epicurus in giving priority to the generation of the parts over their usefulness, which is not predetermined by a demiurge but gained through use and experience. I will especially examine the case of hand tendons, which is described by Galen as emblematic of Asclepiades and Epicurus’ anti-teleologism within biology. As a result of such analysis, I will argue that in the "De Usu" Galen attributes to his rivals two kinds of causal sequence, which correspond to the two stages of adaptation described by Lucretius in book v of the "De Rerum Natura." In conclusion, I will argue that the comparison with Lucretius proves the Epicurean background of Asclepiades’ anti-teleologism and the reliability of Galen’s account.

...More

Citation URI

data.isiscb.org/p/isis/citation/CBB933621108

This citation is part of the Isis database.

Citations Indexes

Similar Citations

Article Frederic Le Blay; (2017)
La controverse de Galien contre Asclépiade et les Méthodiques: défendre l'utilité du médecin

Article Luciano Landolfi; (2014)
Tevrata e Fusiologiva. Lucrezio, polemiche sull'esistenza dei mostri

Article Fabio Tutrone; (2016)
Physiologizing (In)fertility in the Roman World: Lucretius on Sacrifice, Nature, and Generation

Article Tiziano Ottobrini; (2014)
Intorno alla meccanica nel "De rerum natura": la psicologia come machina in Lucrezio

Book Carmelo Salemme; (2010)
Lucrezio e la formazione del mondo. De rerum natura 5, 416-508

Article Luigi Arata; (2014)
Lo scienziato Lucrezio nell'interpretazione di Andrade

Article Ambra Serangeli; (2022)
Asclepiade di Bitinia, Celio Aureliano e l'etica medica

Article Fabio Stok; (2019)
Quando Asclepiade arrivò a Roma?

Article Chiara Thumiger; (2019)
Asclepiades on Phrenitis and the Problem of Consistency (Caelius Aurelianus, Ac.Dis. 1.1, 14-15)

Article David Leith; (2019)
Asclepiades’ Therapeutics in the Elder Pliny

Article Sabrina Grimaudo; (2019)
Onkoi atomici? Ancora sulle particelle di Asclepiade di Bitinia

Article Francesco Verde; (2019)
Asclepiade tra Epicuro e Stratone di Lampsaco

Article Aurora Corti; Franco Giorgianni; Graziano Ranocchia; (2019)
Scrittore epicureo anonimo opera incerta PHerc. 1390/908: edizione, introduzione e commentario, tavole

Chapter Francesco Castaldi; (2016)
The Ancient Atomism and Peculiar Consequences

Book Marco Beretta; (2015)
La rivoluzione culturale di Lucrezio: filosofia e scienza nell'antica Roma

Book Lucretius; Leonardo Galli; (2024)
Scienza e meraviglia in Lucrezio. Un commento a De rerum natura 6, 703-1089

Article Véronique Boudon-Millot; (2016)
Aux origines de la génétique: la ressemblance comme fondement de l'appartenance au genos

Book Giuseppe Cambiano; (2006)
Figure, macchine, sogni. Saggi sulla scienza antica

Article Riccardo Chiaradonna; (2017)
Galeno e le dispute dei filosofi: la generazione del cosmo

Article Ricardo Julião; (2022)
Galen on the Anatomy of Memory